 Ladies and gentlemen, welcome. This is going to be a conversation. So, and we will open it up to all of you. So please feel free to think about the things you'd like to talk about. I think you all have the bios of people here. So I'm not going to go into any detail, but Subhash Prabhu is the Minister of Commerce for India. Rajanish Kumar is the Chairman of the State Bank of India, which is the largest bank in the world. State-owned, we are then joined by the estimable, Sir Martin Sorrell, basically the most famous advertising magnate executive tycoon in the world, the CEO of WPP. And Chetna Sena, who's one of the chairs of Davos this year, and the founder and chair of the Man Deshi Foundation, which is a great organization in India. So I think what I should do, probably, Sirash Prabhu, is I begin with you by asking you, my Indian friends for many years told me that India was going to win the race against China. And I would say to them, Indians are supposed to be good at math. The Chinese economy is three times the size of India's and it's growing faster than India's. How mathematically is that possible? Now the Chinese economy is four times the size of India's. The Chinese middle class is 10 times the size of India's. I know that the Indian economy is doing OK, but is there any prospect? Do you have any hope that you could actually get to a point where you're talking about 8%, 9% growth, which is really what you need to break the back of poverty in India? Firstly, I don't think we are in competition with any other country in the world. That comparison, which was made by good people because we always need issues, so sometimes this comparison that helps media as well. It was made by Kamal Nath, by the way, a predecessor in your office. We should not deprive them of that on our own doing that. But as a matter of fact, if you look at absolute numbers, we are very clear. We are growing today close to 8%. I mean, not exactly, but we are. And we are preparing... Partly by adjusting the figures. But I'm saying we are very sure, even by this number, we'd be five trillion dollars by this number. We'd be five trillion dollars in the matter of another seven to eight years' time. We have always seen that the doubling of Indian economy should happen in a matter of every six to seven years inevitably, the growth rate that will happen. There are so many things that we're holding us back. We are trying to do the structural reforms to bring that potential into India's economy to four. And therefore, we are very sure that it's a matter of time that how many years more we'll take to double it to make 10 trillion dollars. I think some economies, as we have seen, they actually plateau after some time. But India is going to grow for at least another 40 years' time. So what will happen in 40 years' time? We don't know. I think I'm sure you'll be there. I may not be there. I'm older than you. But I'm sure you'll see that time that India will be a very substantially higher economy with a lot of issues that poverty, including, will have been addressed. And in fact, now we have kept a very challenging task for ourselves is to double farmers' income in next five years to address so many of these issues in the next five years. The prime minister himself has belt it out. And if you're working on that, so what we are concerned about is not a race against anybody on competition with anybody. China, obviously, is a bigger economy. They are our neighbors. We wish them well. But that doesn't mean that we'll not be growing at a rate that they have seen in the past. Their economies has also slowed down a bit. So I think we are not even started looking at our real potential. So we start growing. Maybe 8%, 9% will be reality soon. And maybe even after that, I will just tell you one very interesting thing. One is what we are planning is we have about 700 odd districts in India. So we want to do top-bottom approach. In a sense, bottoms-up approach. One is that every district in India, which has services, manufacturing, and agriculture of various type, if they can be growing at 3% more than what they're growing today, and that's possible with the micro-level palimps that go into that, we'll also bring in a different element of dynamism for growth in India. Secondly, we are creating our new industrial policy, wherein we are focusing on modernizing the existing industries as well as focusing on new industries, which are not even born today. So we are trying to identify those industries. We are trying to focus on services, which will be growing at a faster rate than even manufacturing agriculture. And they have already done almost two-thirds of an economy come from services. But as we can go along, we'll definitely see the services even growing faster and exports into services will be more than the merchandise exports. So we are preparing a very holistic, comprehensive strategy to make it happen. And I'm sure the India's potential. Another interesting thing about India. What is India's growth story, as opposed to other countries theory? It is driven by people themselves. It's a private sector-driven growth. So when we remove all the hurdles in the way of private sector growing, I don't know what will be the potential. So when we talk about what is the install capacity of a machine, we know. What is the install capacity of a mind? We don't know. So when we remove the hurdles in the way, how much they will make that growth possible is something we don't know. And that's the beauty of India's growth story. It's people driven. But you talk about the hurdles. It is still true that India has some of the most restrictive labor laws in the world. Very hard to hire and fire people easily. It is still true that land acquisition is very, very difficult. And it is still true that if you take a point in the middle of India, the cost of transporting goods to the port, which is often a 400-mile journey, is five to eight times higher than the cost of moving the goods from that port to Chicago, 10,000 miles away. No, absolutely. So you have to know India very well. So you are absolutely right. But I am saying, this is precisely the issues you are trying to address. Logistic is something which is a priority for us. I was a railways minister till recently. So a railways minister has to do only railways. There's a road minister doing the roads, port minister doing the port. Civil aviation will fly above all of us. Am I right? You are the largest employer in the world. That's right. Indian railways. How many people do you employ? That's right. It's like 1 million people. 1.3 million. 1.3 million people. Not much. With all these different kinds of fronts, so first time the Prime Minister has created a logistic department in the government. And in fact, I'm in charge of that is the Commerce Ministry. What we are working on is completely digitalization of logistic to make sure that the speed that you talked about, the speed of the roads, you need to, it's not bytes that are a problem. It's atoms that are the problem. But at the same time, some of the problems that you talked about, the cost as well as the speed of transportation, can be addressed. You only need today's infrastructure, only if you can have a multiple model approach towards the infrastructure. For example, you want to move goods from one place to another. There are multiple options. Not necessary to use the same option by taking one place to another. So we are working on that. While we do that, we are also creating infrastructure at a rapid rate. I'll give you an example. Railways. We investing in the first three years of this government as much as we invested in the first 70 years cumulatively of the post-independence India. So you can imagine the amount of money that we are putting into infrastructure. Same for roads, same for ports, same for civil aviation. India's civil aviation sector is the fastest-going civil aviation sector in the world. And therefore, we are actually working on that. And, but even then, that's the point I was making. And finally, you're going to privatize Air India. I think every Indian will breathe a sigh of relief. And that's what the point I was making was that, despite the fact that we'll grow each of these sectors separately, unless we have a synergy. And that's what the digitalization of infrastructure would mean. So while we grow all this, if we don't have a binging in the synergy, that's what we are trying to do. But we are absolutely right. We are aware of the challenges which are holding us back. And that's why I'm saying, you can imagine yourself, as you correctly said. If you remove all this, what will be the growth potential of India? Rajini, let me ask you. You run the largest bank in India. The state-owned banks have, I think, 75% of the savings of the Indian people. And yet, HDFC, a private bank, has a larger market cap than every state-owned bank combined. Isn't the market telling you that you're massively inefficient? And it's sort of telling you that the government shouldn't be in this business. Why is the government in the business of providing loans other than as political patronage? And you don't have all the wrong incentives. You're told, give loans to people on a political basis, rather than economic one. I think there are a lot of misunderstandings standing around this issue. Number one, an apple cannot be compared with an orange. So HDFC is a private sector bank. It has a definite business strategy, which is very different from the public sector banks. But you look at the public sector banks and their role in the financial inclusion and the social service. Is it comparable with any public sector, any private sector banks? You look at my branch network. I operate in Ladakh. I operate in Sair, all these places. Probably you might not have even listened or heard about these places. Is it possible for any, I'm not criticizing, I'm not on the issue of private versus public at the moment. But what I am pointing out, the realities of India, which is 1.3 billion people, and a large, large section of the people are poor. So in such circumstances, if today, India were to leave everything to private sector banks and where they are driven by the return to the shareholders, will it be possible for a country like India to provide the banking services to its masses the way in which public sector banks are doing it? So there are two dimensions. One is that because of the fact that in the last three, four years, there were big challenges around the asset quality, corporate loans going back. But the role of the public sector banks in furthering the financial inclusion agenda of a country like India, I don't think that you can wish away public sector banking in the country. And today, I think there was a very, very categorical statement by the finance minister that public sector banks are going to stay in India. Yes, when it is a private sector bank which has a distinct business strategy, which is very different than what other banks are doing, then I think the comparison is not right to me. And definitely because the share market or the capitalization, it is driven by the quality of the earnings, consistency of earnings. So it is a very different ballgame, but I would suggest that when a comparison is made, it should also be made that what contribution? I'm not again saying that private sector banks or HDFC bank is not contributing to the growth of the economy or the country, but the role which public sector banks in India are playing, it is much more if you look at, even we have burnt our fingers or the body, but the kind of investment which happened in the infrastructure, if you look at it, who supported it? It was the banks like State Bank of India and the public sector banks. 75,000 megawatt of capacity was added in the country in five years between 2011 to 2016. Do you think that if we were not there as public sector banks supporting that nation building task, would it have been possible to add that kind of capacity in the country? So when a comparison is being made, I think it has to be made on very different parameters and the comparison has to be between an apple and an apple. Do you think that the rise of cell phones, smart phones is your principal challenge or is it your principal opportunity? Because I look at what has happened in India, the most extraordinary revolution in the last five, 10 years in India and maybe in the world has been this move. India went from being 155th in cellular bandwidth consumption to number one, 750 million smart phones. Now these people can do with Aadhar. They have a biometric ID. They have a smartphone. They can do cashless transactions. How do you remind them, insert yourself in the middle of that relationship and say, I'm a bank. I want to be the guy doing the banking, not your phone company. No, I think that convergence between banking or a technology company or a telecom company. So those walls are disappearing. So it is very difficult to say that that is what we are saying when the telecom companies are becoming payment banks. And payment banks, they are, the main stream banks are now so much dependent upon the technology and mobile banking. So that convergence will happen. And today the banks also see themselves as a technology company or vice versa. So the mobile banking is the future, definitely. And as public sector bank and as the largest bank in India, we have invested quite heavily in the technology and our digital applications are now a state of the art. We did roll out a digital application just on 24th November, which is just you only need one. And what it will allow you to do, everything you imagine in respect of banking transaction through only one application, accepting that I can't disperse cash out of mobile phone and receive cash in mobile phone. That we can't even do in the United States or in China, which is really the world leader right now. Martin, when you... Listening to you for a little bit. Scared by the intimidatory questioners. LAUGHTER Killer questions. Wow, I'm wondering what you're saving up for me. You get the easy one. Thank God for that. What does it look like for a foreign investor? Because my experience of talking to foreign investors is they feel somewhat burned on India. They all went in the beginning of the UPA government 10 years ago, and they feel as though it was just... At the end of the day, it was India. It was hard and difficult and on the ground. Things didn't work, and they were told that they could use the courts as a recourse, and the courts are even more bureaucratic and cumbersome, whimsical tax policy. Is it your sense that people are looking at the genuine accomplishments of this government? And has there been a mind shift or are they still cautious? Well, look, I just sort of step back for a minute and look at it the way that we look at it, and I think similar to our clients. So if I take 2017, which was a tough year for us, you know, what were one of the bright spots, apart from the U.K., I'm interested enough, despite Brexit, was India. So, and if I look at the future, I mean, I see a world and maybe I'm too influenced by what we've seen in Davos last year with President Xi, what we see here with President Trump, with Prime Minister Modi here. People look at the world as being dominated by a G2 world, China and the U.S., or U.S. and China. China will catch up in absolute terms. It's 20 trillion versus 10, roughly, India at 2.5 trillion. For us as a business, by the way, India is our sixth largest market. We do about $800 million of revenue that China has doubled at 1.7, so it's a two-to-one here, but we have a very big market share in India. I'm not going to even tell you what a market share is in India. But that's been driven by local companies and by multinational companies. So get to the heart of your question. If the world's growing at 3% to 4%, and India is growing, whatever the statistic, whether it's seven, whether it's a bunch, the statistic of eight, it's more, just like China. And if I look at it very simply, our clients and ourselves, where we're looking for the growth and the population, and India will be the most populous country on the planet within probably, what, 15, 20, 25 years of that nature. So in terms of a young population and a technologically advanced population, because it's leapfrogged, where you just said a few minutes ago is very significant because they went through, from almost from analog to smartphone without any of the interrupting leaps that we've had to go through in the US or the UK. So if you put that little lot together and you look that for international companies are looking for growth, I don't think they have much choice, actually. And I look at it as being a G3 world. I was thinking about Davos this year. Maybe I was influenced by our meeting with Prime Minister Modi. But I do think of it that way. And I think India, we have 20,000 people there. Interestingly, China is double the size and we have 17,000 people. India is half the size and revenues. We have almost 20,000. Well, it makes sense. Labor is much cheaper in India. Yeah, but I bet you mentioned about labor market flexibility. I mean, we have the same problem in France, by the way, labor market flexibility. So I think the answer to it, and if I look at the success of Hindustan Leaver, for example, Unilever subsidiary in India, which became its most prominent subsidiary, actually, you may have seen a press article a few days ago about that. And I look at the success of that coming, taking it as an example. It's a mixture, really, of an international company and a local company. Now, to the heart of your question, I think you have to establish a balance and I think China is no different. The problem the multinationals have is they are multinational companies. And what you have to do is, I think, to localize your model as much as you possibly can. One of the reasons why Hindustan Leaver, or Unilever is so successful, is it is a separately quoted company, very highly valid at 50 times earnings on the Indian stock exchange. So, I think, for me, the answer to your question is, it's inevitable. I mean, I'm an Indian bull and I am a raging Indian bull and I believe the potential of the country. And all the things that you're seeing take place under Modi's leadership. There's something maybe about leaders whose names begin with M. So, Merkel, Macri, Theresa May may be. Not Mussolini. You just spoiled your board. But he's really made a major difference, just like Macri actually in a very short period of time has made a difference. And the structural reforms, the political reforms, the infrastructure reforms, the fiscal reforms, the GST monetization, taking risk, demonetization, taking risk. And I think what it needed was a strong leader. I was talking to an Indian, I won't reveal who it was, just this afternoon. He was saying, I've got a little bit of doubts as to whether his leadership has been strong enough. You need a leader who's going to drive an economy to your point at about, he said, 10% a year to get it into the stratosphere. But I would bet on Modi. I would bet on India. I shouldn't use the word bet. I would invest in Modi, invest in India. Despite the issues, and some of our clients without naming them, have had the difficulties that you mentioned. The bureaucracy difficulties, the taxation difficulties, the labor mobility and flexibility issues. But as I look at the world stage that we do, we operate 112, 113 countries, I see India really primed for the future. Chitna, you have, I think in some ways, the broadest perspective, because one of the questions I think we often forget about when we think about these numbers is you're actually taking a country where a very large society, a very ancient society, and you're making it go through this very dramatic change, change that, I mean, the West industrialized at 2.5%, and that was considered very fast. America industrialized at 3%, and that was why it emerged the richest country in the West. We're expecting these countries to, in a sense, move three times as fast. What is that doing in India? What are your concerns? What do you see? So the first, I would like to say that yesterday in an inaugural session, our Prime Minister said that, you know, we are having a red carpet for the investors. And it came in my mind that, how would it be that, you know, if we have a red carpet for our street vendors, for women who are doing business on the road, in the heat, but they are ready for it. In India, we have 72,000 weekly markets. Imagine, and in each weekly market, around majority of our women vendors, and so each weekly market, there are some more than 1,000 women doing it. So 72 million women are doing business on the road, on the street, and they want to grow their business. And I just thought that if somebody tells them, we have a red carpet for you, and this is the red carpet to grow your business, I think you know what, Mr. Prabhu, we are going to drive the economy. I mean, if these people who are spending their body, I mean, they are on the street doing business, working so hard, they are not asking for any subsidy. They are not asking for any grant. What they are asking is, make a life simple. We have smart phone. We can get information on phone. If we don't know also, we can find the ways. We run the business school for rural women, and they come to us, and they say that we have a smart phone. We don't want household phone. We want our own individual phone. We want to control IE wallet. This is the aspiration in the population. And if this aspirated population, which is having street vendors, they are doing business, if we have a red carpet, then they will be doing their business at a four or five times. I do believe that, you know, India is looking as, I mean, farmer leader is sitting here. When I talk about farmers increasing the double income, imagine if really double income of farmers is grown, if the micro enterprise grow, jobs in India will definitely be created. Economic and drive. But yes, these are the challenges, and I feel very strongly, and I put very strongly that yes, investors do have a lot of bureaucracy and all this, but it's not investors. It's a domestic people everyday life getting our property papers. I want my property papers, and I have to stand in a queue. I want connectivity, and that is, and everything is that everybody is really working hard. Ease of banking. Ease of business is not just for the investors. It is actually for the micro enterprise. And here, actually, I'm very ambitious. I mean, every time I say that, when I close my eyes, I hear the voices of half million women whom I'm representing, and they are saying that tell the investors, if you don't invest in us, you'll lose the opportunity. What else would they want? Because India, the women in India is a fascinating story, right? I mean, India has always had very powerful female goddesses, for example, Durga Akali. It has had one of the first women, female prime ministers. And yet, there's still enormous amount of physical abuse of women. There is an enormous, enormous disadvantages to being a woman. What is your assessment of where women are in India today? So that is really challenging. I mean, I can try my best to glamorize everything, but still the challenge is that the safety and the security of the women in India or in cities is an issue. And I do believe that, yes, policymakers are there, government is there, and you have the system, which may, it's not a question of just safety and security, but it's a question of providing the dignity, understanding them as an equal citizen. You have a Durga Akali, but then if you have a women who are working for 14 hours just to get water, I mean, there's no comparison. So I don't, I mean, that is those great traditions are there, but I should say that, that this equality has to be there, and there I see two levels. One is of course, the policymakers will have to take some concrete stand and do it. And the second, which I think is very important, is how do you raise your children in this country? How would mothers raise their sons? And I think those things also, those soft things have to come out. It can come from the education system. It can come from the other institutions, academic institution. And I would just like to share a very small example. Of course, it's very local, but I would like to share that in our bank, we have a product where if husband shares the property with their wives, they get a debate in interest. Okay. And we got many men coming forward, getting that ownership, co-ownership. And we celebrate those men who are investing in their daughters. Celebrate those men who are ready to share the power with their wives. If, because it's not only just talking, we need those role models also. And how do you do that? And bring on the broader stage. These are the issues. I know it's a local, but you have to bring into the mainstream. So I would just like say two things very clearly. One, number one, as I mentioned about the, providing the red carpet for the micro enterprise and easy business, they will create the jobs and about the secure, if women are safer and secured, they will drive the economy if they get spaces in the, or mainstream in the sector. Suresh, let me ask you about another kind of inclusion. The government generally gets high good marks for economic policy. It gets good marks on administrative issues. But there are many people who argue that it has adopted a strategy of kind of low level, but consistent exclusion of minorities, particularly Indian Muslims. That this is a strategy that works electorally. You look at the UP elections, you look at, but that ultimately it's a dangerous strategy. First of all, it's unjust, but it's also dangerous because you have a very large population of Muslims in India that so far have been remarkably unradicalized. You have 150 million Indian Muslims. And basically there are no members of al-Qaeda or ISIS. I mean, maybe one or two. And that's remarkable when you think about the fact that it's right next to Pakistan, right next to Afghanistan. Is that a fair criticism that in the search for electoral advantage, the BJP has marginalized Indian Muslims? You know, I would actually say that this is the first government which does not discriminate the population on the basis of their religion. We strongly believe that all the citizens of India enjoy the equal rights, equal privileges, and they should therefore not be discriminated based on the religion, what your faith, what religion is a faith, that what you follow. So I think we really do not do that. It is unfortunately true that some of the Muslims, for example, may not have been elected to the local assembly in the number that they should have been, but that's something which is the electoral process. But if you ask my party's philosophy very strongly, and that's what I mean is to reiterate it again, is sabka sadh sabka vikas means it is actually the most inclusive slogan that we can think about. We always believe that when the rain falls, the rain does not discriminate between this house and that house. It falls on everybody's house. Same thing should be the role of the government, that whatever government schemes are, we should give it to everybody. In fact, I will tell you that a UP chief minister who wears saffron clothes is actually going out of his way to find out how government schemes will reach out to all sections of society, including the Muslim. So we actually do not believe in this because we do not believe that we should use a religion at the time of election to make sure that one particular class of people would vote for us that we don't believe in doing that. And therefore, we strongly believe that all the cities of India should not be discriminated against. In fact, one good example I will give you, if we were against the Muslims, we never thought about bringing a triple talak wheel to the parliament. If you talk about Muslims, say 14%, the 7% are women, and she talked about women. What's the best way to protect a woman that what she was talking about? Then a right in a matrimony, that when she has a right to live in light and then she should not be expelled. So if we were against a community, why would we bring bills like this to protect a woman even at the expense of alienating maybe a sizeable population? So this is one good example of doing that. We want to make sure that we'll provide them the right schemes, we're not discriminated against it. And I can tell you this as our priority area that all cities of India should not be, no citizen of India should be discriminated, all citizens should be treated equally. And by doing this, we are unnecessarily creating a rift between the communities. The best way that we are lived in harmony for hundreds of years, the politics created this division. The politics should heal it. And that's why that's our political line is that we should try to make sure that we live in a seamless society with all people enjoying the same rights and then we should participate in the growth of India. And if the India grows, everybody will benefit. But India doesn't grow, how are you going to benefit? So therefore, the fruits of growth should reach to everybody, that's another part. But first, the fruit must grow, otherwise how are you going to give the fruits of growth to everybody? All right, let's open it up to questions and I would only ask that you please ask an actual question. We have four panelists, we don't need more. What we need are people asking questions. I say this, I have a friend who's a CEO who's a factory in India in China and told him what's the difference between operating in them. He says, two very different atmospheres. In China, they work very hard, they get the job done, but it's very hard to get them to tell you the problems, to tell you what their challenges are, to tell you what. And I said in India, he said it's exactly the opposite problem. You can't get them to shut up. So, you've been warned. You've been warned. My question is for Minister Prabhu and Sinhaji. We talked about women empowerment in our country. 50% of workforce is underutilized today. And in some of the developed nations like US, there is a scheme of quotas for women-owned businesses and they are given priority in government contracts. Would you consider in the budget giving women-owned businesses a priority in government contracts? So, what do you want to say? Quotas for women-owned businesses. Would you consider creating some kind of reservation policy for government contracts for women-owned businesses? Or how would you want to empower women? You know, basically, let me tell you, we have a very strong gender bias in favor of women. In fact, the Prime Minister's program of Betty Bachao, Betty Padau, which he again mentioned yesterday, what is this program all about? We actually, you talked about that. Save your daughter. Your bank has done it. You asked this bank chairman, this was our proposal, that when we went for universalization of bank operation, wherein every family must have a bank account, we insisted that women also must have bank. So, before your bank, we did that. So, I was also chairman of a bank some years ago, but we could never do that. So, this is what we tried to put it into a system like this. Thirdly, we strongly feel that, you know, now the women entrepreneurs are also rising. And what she said is right. The women entrepreneurs in rural areas are a very significant portion of our workforce. They are actually self-employed. And the point I was telling you earlier, that this unleashing of the power of people themselves will add to GDP, all these women that they are getting. In fact, there was a study which was made that if all the women in India, all, they get only the minimum wage that the Indian government will provide for, the GDP of India will rise by at least 1 to 1.5 percentage point. So, now, rather than giving the what you're asking is about giving contracts and reserving for it, rather than that, we should empower them to do this. And the government contracts are not something which are going to rise here. This basically is a private sector-driven growth in India we are talking about. But therefore, what is important is ensuring that women will get a skilling program. I'll give you one example of my own constituency. 70,000 women, we are trained for self-employment. We are saying that each one of them is getting on our own, I'm not saying all, some of them for family reason may not have opted for this. They get 5,000 to 10,000 rupees monthly income in India. So, this is what has happened in my own rural constituency. This is Konkan. And in fact, this is the NGO called Manosar Vikas, we are doing it. So, this is something which is already happening on the ground. So, what I suggest is empower them, let them allow them to take own decisions. This is something which is important rather than giving this reservation. Because, see, this is something which is another ploy that we can say that we have done something for you. But in reality, that may not happen. So, I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I'm just saying what is more important for us and the priority for us is to ensuring that women start earning their own income and that changes the entire social milieu of the country. Because when women start earning, no husband can raise their hand against a woman because she's economically empowered. That is what I have seen in my own area. This has actually happened. It's my complete rural area in Konkan which I have seen with my own experience. This is what happens. Secondly, the woman when she earns income, she's not spending on drinking like her husband would do. But she's making sure that she teaches her children. The child's education. Which is her children and therefore they are also empowered. So, I think the best way, and that's for a fully agree, the women on the grass road, if we can empower them, make them really on their own. Another revolution that has happened in India which we don't realize is the self-help groups. You cannot imagine the empowerment that has happened as a result of self-help groups. I can tell you when I started doing the 22 years ago in my own constituency, people are laughing at me. What is self-help groups? It's the job of a member of parliament. I was a minister even in that government. So, they say, what is the government minister doing? Self-help groups. What is going to happen? Today we have a huge self-help group. Now, the challenge is how to link this self-help group, they are doing some economic activities, scale up their activities. So, therefore, this is something which you are now working on. Can we connect them to the cooperatives? We have about 100,000 cooperatives in India in the grass root level. Can we link them to them? Can we link these self-help groups with cooperatives so that they start earning and they scale up their operation? So, these are the different challenges that are coming. But, there is an organizationally grass root level self-help groups have come up. This is a great revolution that has happened in India. It's a rural area. Completely rural self-help groups have been created. So, I think some of these development we are not able to capture. And I think our India GDP, when we talk about it, I don't think we really capture all these data that goes in the ground. And therefore, if we can really create this proper database and find out what is it, it's a different story altogether. But still, we are not happy. As I said, we are not yet reached our true potential of growth. And our growth model is very simple. It's people-centric. It is not just creating more airports and more seaports and more roads and more railways. It is definitely that to benefit the people. But people-centric, where their income will rise, and that is what will actually be the more satisfying goal to be achieved rather than there's a GDP number. Let's get some more. Speaking of women, can I get a female questioner? She's right over there. What changes do you think need to be made to the current model of infrastructure growth that we are following at the moment, which is continuing to cause problems in our cities, making them unlivable, causing issues as far as pollution is concerned and urban fragility and health pandemics? What changes would you now make so that the fruit can actually grow to be so that you can eat it? You must be living this problem because Delhi is now officially the world's most polluted major city. So she wants to talk. What, how are you going to tackle issues like pollution, congestion? As we're copying an old America versus a new India. This is another very important issue because GDP numbers can give you economic prosperity at best. But quality of life is a completely different parameter. If you don't improve quality of lives of people, this doesn't happen. I always say this, that when our framers of constitution, they give us a lot of fundamental rights to ensure human dignity, freedom and everything else. But I never thought of giving fundamental rights for clean air and clean water because we never realized that it will happen like this in such a short period of time. So I think this is a real priority for us. Therefore, development paradigm cannot be ignored by not having environmental concern mainstreamed into it. And that is a big challenge for us and big opportunity for us. Because as you said, we are still not as big as some of the countries you mentioned. So therefore, we don't have the same problems of those countries yet. So therefore, we can avoid it. So learning from other countries is one part. But unlearning from the model of other countries another part. So what we really want to do and our great Lord, Nicholas Stern which is who is sitting next to you, we are working very closely with him. And in fact, I spoke in the London School of Economics only a few days ago on this issue that we want to make sure that water and air which should be the most fundamental because that's what people are born with. But what are you doing? That's just fundamental right. What are you doing about it because I don't see much progress. Is firstly, now take air quality which is the Delhi issue. Oh no, it's a Bombay issue. I was in Bombay that you can't see across Marine Drive anymore. So I'll tell you about that. So one is ambient air quality is an issue which causes because of mainly vehicular pollution. This is a empirical evidence. 60% of the air pollution is because of that. So one, we have got a metro for the public transport. The number of cars, that's a prosperity issue. More people, more the poll. So not only Delhi's population are increasing, Delhi's vehicular population increase that even higher. So therefore this is another problem that how do you deal with that? So we are changing the diesel norm. We are trying to bring in electric vehicles. So this will be one of the major component of this. And electric vehicles, again, if you are using the same fossil fuel energy from the grid to make it doesn't make sense. So using solar energy, 170,000 megawatts of renewable energy, we want to add to our energy basket and change the energy profile completely. That again will improve. Also, industry. I think we are set up now very, very stringent industry emission norms which again would mean that they will not be able to emit more. So I think all this put together will be able to work on it. But I will tell you something. Over a period of time, we have learnt a lot. This is a public outcry now which is the most important for a democracy. When people, we go there and say that, you know, we first give us clean air rather than give us clean job. That is what is now influencing the politician. So I think this is another pressure that is coming in. But you are absolutely right. And I must tell you something. I was a minister of environment also. So I have dealt with this issue. So therefore this is a very important issue to deal with and we'll definitely work on it. And I'm not saying that this is something which is simple solution. But the long-term solution with short-term action is something which you're working on. All right. Sir. You mentioned that the outreach of smartphones, cell phones into India has been a great advantage which I completely agree with you. But it has a different angle to it. And that is the aspirational generation without jobs because now, as I see in villages, everybody has a smartphone and you can access and you see things which are very unreal in life. And that is the aspirational generation in the villages which is looking for jobs. And I don't know how advertising could be used to subdue that because it's having an effect where everyone is unhappy with their own situation because they're looking at things which are not real in real life. And it's a big, I think it's something that people are not realizing but the social media is leading to unrest. Unrealizable expectations. Yes, that's right. In the circumstances that exist today, they aren't alive. Tell him this. Sure, quickly. See, basically the fair expectation of a person is a job. And why he wants a job? To un-source of livelihood. See, basically, this is a mindset change. In fact, as a member of parliament, I always, people will say, give me a job. So then I ask you, why you want job? It's obviously for earning money. So what is now is a changing profile of economy globally. It's a kind of jobs. You know, in the U.S., this was a very big phenomena. People are saying Mac jobs some years ago when you were getting hourly jobs than the blue collar jobs. So this is going to happen all over the world and we are discussing in this forum also the changing face of manufacturing. So what is important is people have a right and their fundamental right is to get source of livelihood. That is what the governments are obliged to provide and we'll work on that. But jobs in the conventional way, the profile of job is changing. So therefore, if she mentioned just now, she's also really aware that there are thousands of women are working. That means they have something to do. They are earning income. So what is important is that type of employment is which is there, which is self-employment, which is driving the rural economy, which I'm sure there may be so many hurdles in the way which we must remove, which makes their life better and pleasant. So that's something which we're working on. Incidentally, the question that she asked me and the question you're asking me, the Prime Minister is working on a very interesting idea. She's saying ease of doing business, what you mentioned as something not important. He's working on a concept of ease of living. He's saying can we come out with a ease of living index, wherein all the issues that we are facing today can be addressed. So if ease of living improves, obviously ease of doing business, everything else will automatically fall in place. So this is something which is people-centric, ease of living. Why not we make the living of people far better than what it is today? That's what we are working on. And I will tell you something. If you ask me, then why not do it in three years? This is something, if it was such a simple thing to be done in three years, and then I think it could have been done within a button of that technology, not yet developed. But we are working on it, and I'm sure it's a- Let me ask Chetna for her response after yours, Martin. Well, just listening to your question, I mean, it'll be the first time that we've tried to moderate consumption or expectations. But I think communications could realistically change the horizon, you could say. And I was looking at the Indian planning process. The Indians of government has moved away from a Soviet-style five-year plan to a 15-year vision with sort of three-year implementation plans. And listening to you, what you said, I was just thinking about the Chinese comparison. I mean, the difference between China and India is China is a directed economy. I remember when they had the expo in Shanghai, asking the mayor of Shanghai where they were going to build the Shanghai site. And he said, well, he had a model in his office and he said, this is the plan of the city and we've got these people living here and that's where the site's going to be. So I said, what are you going to do about the people living there? He literally said to me, well, we're building alternative accommodation over here. And I said, how are you going to get the people from there? There's a large number of people to there. He said, literally, we're going to go in with army trucks on a weekend and over the weekend or week or whatever, we will pick these people up and we'll put them over there and then we'll develop the expo site at Pudong. So it's the difference between two different systems. One is much more autocratic than the other. I think the use of communications could be to change the level of expectation in terms of time. I mean, I think it could dampen down that. But I think the real issue is, is that when a government as strong as Mr. Modi's government is putting the position and sets these big goals and their big hairy goals to grow a country, the second most populous country on the planet will be the largest to grow at this rate and at this scale, clearly you have to manage the expectations at the same time. I mean, my sense is that there is a coordinated plan listening to some of the questions and obviously the implementation of it is extremely difficult. So I think you have to moderate the aspirations but the planning process I think is absolutely critical. In our, in the 32 years that we've been active in India, we've had issues with government bureaucracy but I would say that we have been subject to massive issues. One issue in the TV measurement area, in terms of main to our business, which was particularly difficult but with that one exception, we've actually managed to operate extremely effectively. And I think the other thing is the expectation level is driving, we're talking about this in the green room, is driving rural population into urban cities. This is what the Chinese have, they've managed it extremely well and they've managed the expectations. Do you know why they can manage it? I once had a conversation with the Chief Minister of India. I said, you know, the Chinese have managed to manage urbanization. So you don't have these rings of squatters, these slums surrounding cities because what happens is cities and magnitude of economic opportunity, these people come there and there's so many come sometimes that they choke off the actual economic activity. And he said very truly, he said, I absolutely right, I wish we could do it the Chinese way. I have this small problem called the Constitution of India that guarantees freedom of movement. In India, if somebody says, I want to move to Bombay for a job, as the government, you can't stop them from moving. You then, you know. I would like to extend the point in this way that yes, I see in rural India, I stay in the village. So I see that the young population have a cell phone. They are so busy with it, educated, graduate, not having jobs, maximum time there. Their fathers are in the field doing farming, but they do not see their future there and which is absolutely right. Why would they see it? Because there is no technology, nothing has improved. So what, and I would give you another positive example. Last month, we did an exhibition in Mumbai where all our rural women entrepreneurs came to Mumbai, a hundred of them, with their prod use. Some were making in textile, some were others. And three days, we saw 30,000 people coming there and buying and they did a lot of business. What this indicates is that we have a market. It's not that we are looking for market. We have a population which is ready to do something. Then where is it missing? And in fact, actually I wanted to respond to the previous question also. There are two study which has come, IFC report and McKinsey. IFC report clearly says that there is a missing gap in India and the McKinsey report says that lot of investors have made money in microfinance and they are interested in investing it. So there there is a success. And on the other side, IFC report says that in microenterprise there is a huge gap. If there are 100 loans in the bank for the microenterprise then how many numbers are getting? So this whole missing gap which is there where actually the minister talked about the skilling that what are the jobs? How are we going to create the jobs? The jobs should be such which gives me a dignity. So I have a technology in my hand. I can be a very good clinical person to test the soil or we should have a business clinic for women, business women, where women can have a machines where they can in textile and those technologies are very simple. You don't need nowadays a huge technology. So these are the areas where in the Global Entrepreneurship Summit also 10,000 crore was declared for women entrepreneurs. How are we going to use that? Create those ecosystem where you provide these entrepreneurs a technology, finance and market. If we provide that as a district level then the jobs will be created. Otherwise you see on one side the jobs are not there and you see that there is a printing company they require a laborer but they are not getting it. So this gap you have to customize the skilling and at the same time provide the finance and market linkages and technology. I think that there you can fill up the gap. All right, I think we are out of time but I didn't give you commarsal enough time. Why don't you close us out with some thoughts on this issue of aspirations and empowerment because you are, you do operate everywhere in India. So what do you see? No, it is like a genie. So now it is out. So you can't contain it and just moderate the aspirations. And definitely we have to give opportunity for the people from rural India or even in urban India there is a mass poverty movement now. So those aspirations will have to be provided an outlet. And yes, the access to internet or the mobile banking or to the data. So what the youth today are having a look. And if I compare it with 30 years ago there's a huge difference. But in last 25 years after particularly the liberalization of the economy, India has made great strides. It is not the India of 2017 is entirely different of India. 1990 where everything was scarce and Russian. Today there is no rationing. So if there are aspirations, only thing is that there should be enough opportunities to meet those aspirations. And that's how only the country can grow. And that is where the role of definitely self-employment comes in. The jobs in the manufacturing sector in particular because of the advent of technology, they will not grow at the pace they were in 1980s. If you are a worker in a factory and your job is secured and income is secured, so that has completely changed. And self-employment is going to drive the economy in the country. On that note, thank you all. Fascinating panel. Really enjoyed it. Thank you. Thank you.